WillIBLucky
02-02 07:26 AM
So was the billed passed or not? Logiclife said "NO", but certain members still say its passed.
Shall we now leave this aside and continue working on our goals or should we take a little time off to celebrate yet?
If at all the bill is passed yesterday then we should congratulate ourself for this wondeful job by IV.
Shall we now leave this aside and continue working on our goals or should we take a little time off to celebrate yet?
If at all the bill is passed yesterday then we should congratulate ourself for this wondeful job by IV.
wallpaper Melissa Joan Hart and Mark
wizkid732
08-03 12:23 PM
Really good to hear that. Congrats!!
Mine was at NSC and was approved this morning.
Mine was at NSC and was approved this morning.
GC_Dona
07-24 06:55 PM
pushpakatari,
I am sorry to hear that VISA was not yet issued to your husband and that consulate is giving them a hard time. I pray to God that they get the VISA ASAP.
I am curious to know - if your hasband went to the consulate for the first time for VISA stamping or he had expired US VISA on his passport and a valid I-797 form and if he went for VISA restamping.
I will be travelling to my home country and will be going to US consulate for my H1B VISA stamping with approved I-797 next month. H1b VISA stamp on my passport has expired and I am here in the 8th year of H1B.
Thanks,
I am sorry to hear that VISA was not yet issued to your husband and that consulate is giving them a hard time. I pray to God that they get the VISA ASAP.
I am curious to know - if your hasband went to the consulate for the first time for VISA stamping or he had expired US VISA on his passport and a valid I-797 form and if he went for VISA restamping.
I will be travelling to my home country and will be going to US consulate for my H1B VISA stamping with approved I-797 next month. H1b VISA stamp on my passport has expired and I am here in the 8th year of H1B.
Thanks,
2011 2011 Melissa Joan Hart and
485Mbe4001
06-19 12:47 PM
Enforcement First
The right way to reform immigration.
An NRO Primary Document
Editor's note: This letter was released this morning by John Fonte of the Hudson Institute.
Prominent Conservatives and Civic Leaders Urge President Bush and Congress to Back Enforcement First on Immigration
Leading conservatives and civic leaders have signed an �open letter� on immigration declaring that �border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs.�
The signers include William Bennett, Robert Bork, William F Buckley, Ward Connerly, Newt Gingrich, David Horowitz, David Keene, John Leo, Herbert London, Rich Lowry, Daniel Pipes, Phyllis Schlafly, and Thomas Sowell among others.
Hudson Senior Fellow John Fonte, who organized the letter, said:
�We want to commend the members of Congress who have supported enforcement first including 85% of all Congressional Republicans, 36 Democrats in the House and 4 in the Senate.�
�We particularly want to thank Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and House chairmen Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Peter King (R-NY) for their leadership role in putting America�s national interests in border and interior enforcement first.�
As a matter of organizational policy, Hudson Institute does not take stances on pending legislation.
�First Things First on Immigration: An Open Letter to President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Frist, and Speaker of the House, Hastert�
Recently, columnist Thomas Sowell wrote: �It will take time to see how various new border control methods work out in practice and there is no reason to rush ahead to deal with people already illegally in this country before the facts are in on how well the borders have been secured.�
We the undersigned agree with this statement. In 1986, Congress passed �comprehensive� immigration reform that included amnesty for around 3 million illegal immigrants, border enforcement, and interior enforcement (employer sanctions). Amnesty came, but enforcement was never seriously implemented either at the border or in the interior.
Let us not make this mistake again. We favor what Newt Gingrich has described as �sequencing.� First border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs. We are in the middle of a global war on terror. 2006 is not 1986. Today, we need proof that enforcement (both at the border and in the interior) is successful before anything else happens. As Ronald Reagan used to say �trust, but verify.�
The majority of Republicans in the Senate opposed the recently passed Hagel-Martinez bill. Senator Vitter (R-LA) said that because border enforcement will not be in place, �this [bill] will in fact make the illegal immigration problem much bigger.� The No. 3 Republican in the Senate, Senator Rick Santorum (PA) said, �We need a border-security bill first.� Senator Vitter, Senator Santorum, the majority of Senate Republicans, and the majority of House Republicans are right � we need proven enforcement before we do anything else. Adopting cosmetic legislation to appear to be �doing something� about enforcement, but which actually makes the situation worse, is not statesmanship, it is demagogy.
We thank the majority of the Senate Republicans (33 in all) and the seven Democrats who supported the Isakson amendment, which insists upon verifiable benchmarks for border security before considering other issues. Moreover, we say �Thank You� to Jim Sensenbrenner, Peter King, and the bi-partisan House majority including 36 Democrats, that passed HR 4437. We may quibble with a clause here and there, but you in the House and the majority of Senate Republicans are right to emphasize that the Congress and the President must deal with enforcement first and other issues later. Stand fast; the American people are overwhelmingly with you.
Signed,
William B. Allen, Professor of Political Science at Michigan State University
William J. Bennett, former Secretary of Education under President Reagan, former Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under former President George H.W. Bush
Thomas L. Bock, National Commander of the American Legion
Robert H. Bork, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, former Solicitor General, acting Attorney General, Supreme Court nominee, U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge
William F. Buckley, Jr., founder and Editor-at-Large of National Review
Peter Collier, founding Publisher of Encounter Books, cofounder of Center for the Study of Popular Culture
Ward Connerly, former Regent at the University of California, founder and Chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI), winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
T. Kenneth Cribb, former domestic policy advisor for President Ronald Reagan
Glynn Custred, Professor of Anthropology at California State University, Hayward, and coauthor of the California Civil Rights Initiative, Proposition 209
John C. Eastman, Professor of Law at Chapman University School of Law, Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
John Fonte, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center of American Common Culture at the Hudson Institute
David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush, Resident Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., founder and President of the Center for Security Policy
Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Chairman of the Gingrich Group, Senior Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Jonah Goldberg, Editor-at-Large of the National Review Online, national syndicated columnist
Victor Davis Hanson, Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, recipient of the 1991 American Philological Association Excellence in Teaching Award
David Horowitz, cofounder of the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, Editor of FrontPageMag.com
Fred C. Ikl�, former Undersecretary of Defense under Reagan, former Director of U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
David Keene, Chairman of the American Conservative Union
Brian Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, Publisher of the Claremont Review of Books
Roger Kimball, Managing Editor of The New Criterion
Alan Charles Kors, Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania
Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies
Michael A. Ledeen, Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute
Seth Leibsohn, Fellow at the Claremont Institute
John Leo, columnist and Contributing Editor to U.S. News and World Report
Herbert London, President of the Hudson Institute
Kathryn Jean Lopez, Editor of National Review Online
Rich Lowry, Editor of National Review
Heather Mac Donald, John M. Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
John O�Sullivan, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, Editor-at-Large of National Review
Juliana Pilon, Research Professor at the Institute for World Politics
Daniel Pipes, founder and Director of the Middle East Forum and Campus Watch, former member of the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace
Andrew �Andy� Ramirez, Chairman of the Friends of Border Patrol
Phyllis Schlafly, founder and President of Eagle Forum
Thomas Sowell, Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2003 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Shelby Steele, Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2006 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Stephen Steinlight, Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, former National Affairs Director of the American Jewish Committee, and Vice President of the National Conference of Christians and Jews
Thomas G. West, Director and Senior Fellow of the Claremont Institute, Professor of Politics at the University of Dallas
The right way to reform immigration.
An NRO Primary Document
Editor's note: This letter was released this morning by John Fonte of the Hudson Institute.
Prominent Conservatives and Civic Leaders Urge President Bush and Congress to Back Enforcement First on Immigration
Leading conservatives and civic leaders have signed an �open letter� on immigration declaring that �border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs.�
The signers include William Bennett, Robert Bork, William F Buckley, Ward Connerly, Newt Gingrich, David Horowitz, David Keene, John Leo, Herbert London, Rich Lowry, Daniel Pipes, Phyllis Schlafly, and Thomas Sowell among others.
Hudson Senior Fellow John Fonte, who organized the letter, said:
�We want to commend the members of Congress who have supported enforcement first including 85% of all Congressional Republicans, 36 Democrats in the House and 4 in the Senate.�
�We particularly want to thank Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and House chairmen Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) and Peter King (R-NY) for their leadership role in putting America�s national interests in border and interior enforcement first.�
As a matter of organizational policy, Hudson Institute does not take stances on pending legislation.
�First Things First on Immigration: An Open Letter to President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Frist, and Speaker of the House, Hastert�
Recently, columnist Thomas Sowell wrote: �It will take time to see how various new border control methods work out in practice and there is no reason to rush ahead to deal with people already illegally in this country before the facts are in on how well the borders have been secured.�
We the undersigned agree with this statement. In 1986, Congress passed �comprehensive� immigration reform that included amnesty for around 3 million illegal immigrants, border enforcement, and interior enforcement (employer sanctions). Amnesty came, but enforcement was never seriously implemented either at the border or in the interior.
Let us not make this mistake again. We favor what Newt Gingrich has described as �sequencing.� First border and interior enforcement must be funded, operational, implemented, and proven successful � and only then can we debate the status of current illegal immigrants, or the need for new guest worker programs. We are in the middle of a global war on terror. 2006 is not 1986. Today, we need proof that enforcement (both at the border and in the interior) is successful before anything else happens. As Ronald Reagan used to say �trust, but verify.�
The majority of Republicans in the Senate opposed the recently passed Hagel-Martinez bill. Senator Vitter (R-LA) said that because border enforcement will not be in place, �this [bill] will in fact make the illegal immigration problem much bigger.� The No. 3 Republican in the Senate, Senator Rick Santorum (PA) said, �We need a border-security bill first.� Senator Vitter, Senator Santorum, the majority of Senate Republicans, and the majority of House Republicans are right � we need proven enforcement before we do anything else. Adopting cosmetic legislation to appear to be �doing something� about enforcement, but which actually makes the situation worse, is not statesmanship, it is demagogy.
We thank the majority of the Senate Republicans (33 in all) and the seven Democrats who supported the Isakson amendment, which insists upon verifiable benchmarks for border security before considering other issues. Moreover, we say �Thank You� to Jim Sensenbrenner, Peter King, and the bi-partisan House majority including 36 Democrats, that passed HR 4437. We may quibble with a clause here and there, but you in the House and the majority of Senate Republicans are right to emphasize that the Congress and the President must deal with enforcement first and other issues later. Stand fast; the American people are overwhelmingly with you.
Signed,
William B. Allen, Professor of Political Science at Michigan State University
William J. Bennett, former Secretary of Education under President Reagan, former Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under former President George H.W. Bush
Thomas L. Bock, National Commander of the American Legion
Robert H. Bork, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, former Solicitor General, acting Attorney General, Supreme Court nominee, U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge
William F. Buckley, Jr., founder and Editor-at-Large of National Review
Peter Collier, founding Publisher of Encounter Books, cofounder of Center for the Study of Popular Culture
Ward Connerly, former Regent at the University of California, founder and Chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute (ACRI), winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
T. Kenneth Cribb, former domestic policy advisor for President Ronald Reagan
Glynn Custred, Professor of Anthropology at California State University, Hayward, and coauthor of the California Civil Rights Initiative, Proposition 209
John C. Eastman, Professor of Law at Chapman University School of Law, Director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
John Fonte, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center of American Common Culture at the Hudson Institute
David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush, Resident Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., founder and President of the Center for Security Policy
Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Chairman of the Gingrich Group, Senior Fellow at American Enterprise Institute
Jonah Goldberg, Editor-at-Large of the National Review Online, national syndicated columnist
Victor Davis Hanson, Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, recipient of the 1991 American Philological Association Excellence in Teaching Award
David Horowitz, cofounder of the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, Editor of FrontPageMag.com
Fred C. Ikl�, former Undersecretary of Defense under Reagan, former Director of U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
David Keene, Chairman of the American Conservative Union
Brian Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, Publisher of the Claremont Review of Books
Roger Kimball, Managing Editor of The New Criterion
Alan Charles Kors, Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania
Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies
Michael A. Ledeen, Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute
Seth Leibsohn, Fellow at the Claremont Institute
John Leo, columnist and Contributing Editor to U.S. News and World Report
Herbert London, President of the Hudson Institute
Kathryn Jean Lopez, Editor of National Review Online
Rich Lowry, Editor of National Review
Heather Mac Donald, John M. Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, winner of the 2005 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
John O�Sullivan, Senior Fellow at the Hudson Institute, Editor-at-Large of National Review
Juliana Pilon, Research Professor at the Institute for World Politics
Daniel Pipes, founder and Director of the Middle East Forum and Campus Watch, former member of the board of the U.S. Institute of Peace
Andrew �Andy� Ramirez, Chairman of the Friends of Border Patrol
Phyllis Schlafly, founder and President of Eagle Forum
Thomas Sowell, Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow on Public Policy at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2003 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Shelby Steele, Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution, winner of the 2006 Bradley Prize for Outstanding Intellectual Achievement
Stephen Steinlight, Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, former National Affairs Director of the American Jewish Committee, and Vice President of the National Conference of Christians and Jews
Thomas G. West, Director and Senior Fellow of the Claremont Institute, Professor of Politics at the University of Dallas
more...
pbuckeye
05-05 11:56 AM
Finally, done
PD: June 7th 2006
SC: Texas
I-485 Status: Card Production Ordered
LUID: 05/04/2011
Thank you all IV friends.
Thanks
MC
Congrats MC! Do stay to keep the discussions lively :)
PD: June 7th 2006
SC: Texas
I-485 Status: Card Production Ordered
LUID: 05/04/2011
Thank you all IV friends.
Thanks
MC
Congrats MC! Do stay to keep the discussions lively :)
GC_Applicant
02-25 02:09 AM
Thanks for sharing the charts.
Now I am really confused between going forward with stocks vs forex. I understand that forex is traded 24x7, wont they be helpfull if you can trade during the stock market hours. What is your thoughts??
E-mini S&P 500 Futures (http://www.cme.com/trading/prd/equity/emini-sp500_FO.html)
Each points = $50. Example Sold short at 796 and bought at 788. 796-788 = 8 points and that means 8*50 = 400 dollars profit.
E-mini NASDAQ-100 Futures (http://www.cme.com/trading/prd/equity/emini-nasdaq100.html)
Each point = $20.
>> If you could share your charts and explain your strategy
I can not share my strategy, however I can share my daily charts.
Disclaimer: Information use only and should not be constructed as an offer to buy or sell any securities. Trading is very risky and is not for everyone.
Now I am really confused between going forward with stocks vs forex. I understand that forex is traded 24x7, wont they be helpfull if you can trade during the stock market hours. What is your thoughts??
E-mini S&P 500 Futures (http://www.cme.com/trading/prd/equity/emini-sp500_FO.html)
Each points = $50. Example Sold short at 796 and bought at 788. 796-788 = 8 points and that means 8*50 = 400 dollars profit.
E-mini NASDAQ-100 Futures (http://www.cme.com/trading/prd/equity/emini-nasdaq100.html)
Each point = $20.
>> If you could share your charts and explain your strategy
I can not share my strategy, however I can share my daily charts.
Disclaimer: Information use only and should not be constructed as an offer to buy or sell any securities. Trading is very risky and is not for everyone.
more...
waitingmygc
04-19 03:08 PM
Application Posted (Mail) : March 30th
Application Received (As mentioned in Notice): April 1st
EAD Receipt Notice : April 13th
EAD Receipt Received in Mail: April 17th
Hope others will get it soon.
Application Received (As mentioned in Notice): April 1st
EAD Receipt Notice : April 13th
EAD Receipt Received in Mail: April 17th
Hope others will get it soon.
2010 Melissa Joan Hart at event of
forever_waiting
01-11 01:52 PM
Every member who is discussing this thread and thinks this bill has a chance, schedule a meetign with your lawmaker today so that you can discuss OVERALL IV provisions and get a specific response on whether they will support, co-sponsor and vote for this bill. That will give us a direct answer instead of us speculating on the thread for months together.
If we get 40-50 lawmaker meetings scheduled over the next 3-5 weeks, that itself will provide us with enough feedback to decide whether this bill is worth it or not.
The point I am trying to make is that IV core is here to guide us and support us with national level advocacy. Nothing is going to happen in Congress until the grass roots efforts pushes congressmen/congresswomen/senators to think about a bill. Us sitting here and requesting IV to take up a cause (without any grassroots effort to back it up) is NOT going to help.
Its only after meeting a lawmaker that we realize how Congress works. No one is waiting to fight our cause...we have to push for it and use the IV platform.
So the plan can be -
1) everyone here who is positive about this bill..schedule a lawmaker meeting. I volunteer to coordinate the list of lawmaker meetings scheduled.
2) create a googlegroup with list of people working on the initiative. Keep track of feedback from each meeting.
3) WIth the feedback from the 40-50 meetings, we will know if this bill has any steam. Even if not, we will at least have established a rapport with local lawmaker offices which can be used for other piecemeal legislations that come up.
4) Keep the list of lawmaker meeting volunteers open and growing so that we will eventually have a large group of grass-roots volunteers regularly working on lawmaker meetings. These folks can keep track of legislations (through the forum, coordinator) and immediately schedule grass-roots advocacy/meetings when needed.
We have to create a culture and a habit within the EB community of regularly meeting with lawmakers so that every one of our local lawmaker offices has our issues on their fingertips (even if they oppose us). merely coming to a forum and requesting iv core to do all they can, the day before a bill is to come to vote, is (for lack of other terms) plain stupid.
Is anybody in?
If we get 40-50 lawmaker meetings scheduled over the next 3-5 weeks, that itself will provide us with enough feedback to decide whether this bill is worth it or not.
The point I am trying to make is that IV core is here to guide us and support us with national level advocacy. Nothing is going to happen in Congress until the grass roots efforts pushes congressmen/congresswomen/senators to think about a bill. Us sitting here and requesting IV to take up a cause (without any grassroots effort to back it up) is NOT going to help.
Its only after meeting a lawmaker that we realize how Congress works. No one is waiting to fight our cause...we have to push for it and use the IV platform.
So the plan can be -
1) everyone here who is positive about this bill..schedule a lawmaker meeting. I volunteer to coordinate the list of lawmaker meetings scheduled.
2) create a googlegroup with list of people working on the initiative. Keep track of feedback from each meeting.
3) WIth the feedback from the 40-50 meetings, we will know if this bill has any steam. Even if not, we will at least have established a rapport with local lawmaker offices which can be used for other piecemeal legislations that come up.
4) Keep the list of lawmaker meeting volunteers open and growing so that we will eventually have a large group of grass-roots volunteers regularly working on lawmaker meetings. These folks can keep track of legislations (through the forum, coordinator) and immediately schedule grass-roots advocacy/meetings when needed.
We have to create a culture and a habit within the EB community of regularly meeting with lawmakers so that every one of our local lawmaker offices has our issues on their fingertips (even if they oppose us). merely coming to a forum and requesting iv core to do all they can, the day before a bill is to come to vote, is (for lack of other terms) plain stupid.
Is anybody in?
more...
AreWeThereYet
08-02 03:25 PM
Problem being that last page of that thread keeps refreshing itself and everytime i scroll down to the bottom of the page it keeps going back to the top. Sounds like some script is running in the background.
I had the page scrolling issue too on IE 6 (at work) . Now, I open IV forumns on firefox and I do not have the problem anymore.
I had the page scrolling issue too on IE 6 (at work) . Now, I open IV forumns on firefox and I do not have the problem anymore.
hair Melissa Hart is a star on an
sertasheep
08-03 09:57 PM
While this is an important issue, it could be largely addressed if backlogs are eliminated, thus speeding up the adjudication time. At this time there is no specific charter to address this issue, however, this is a problem that persists across the spectrum, and not only in employment-based immigration categories.
(I will bring this to the notice of the Core Group, however, one should take note that we cannot have a very broad agenda, as it would be challenging for us to approach Congress with requests).
(I will bring this to the notice of the Core Group, however, one should take note that we cannot have a very broad agenda, as it would be challenging for us to approach Congress with requests).
more...
chingchang
05-05 04:10 PM
Hi! is this true? they are approving cases randomly? what happen to FIFO?
I guess one has to pray for luck ! Is there no reason to worry? What if your case has been denied after 13 months of waiting , that's really bad luck.
Thanks for the info. by the way.
i asked the same question about rejection they said we dont accept any rejections and we will file MTR, and they dont have any rejections from past 6 years
one of my friend in the same company got approval in 3 months that one is not audited
we both filed at the same time atlanta centre he is lucky guy
I guess one has to pray for luck ! Is there no reason to worry? What if your case has been denied after 13 months of waiting , that's really bad luck.
Thanks for the info. by the way.
i asked the same question about rejection they said we dont accept any rejections and we will file MTR, and they dont have any rejections from past 6 years
one of my friend in the same company got approval in 3 months that one is not audited
we both filed at the same time atlanta centre he is lucky guy
hot quot;Melissa Joan Hartquot;, actor,
amitjoey
02-01 02:37 PM
We are 8719 members as of today. Marching towards 10,000 members.
18 new members in a day. Please use the INVITE YOUR FRIENDS feature
to invite your friends to IV.
18 new members in a day. Please use the INVITE YOUR FRIENDS feature
to invite your friends to IV.
more...
house Melissa Joan Hart
NolaIndian32
04-09 04:49 PM
I am happy to report that Team IV Memberships have started rolling in from a few non-IVians who support us legal immigrants!! This is very encouraging.
tattoo Melissa Joan Hart Actors Joey
vedicman
01-12 10:19 AM
Your input is good, goodintentions!
With my experience, it is best to meet with the staff members first and then send out emails.
With my experience, it is best to meet with the staff members first and then send out emails.
more...
pictures Melissa Joan Hart was on the
tooclose
08-03 09:23 PM
When USCIS sent you the RFE notice, you would have seen "Request for Evidence". After USCIS receives your response, you would have seen the hard LUD, while the header is still for RFE. Then after some days (with in 60 days), the header changes to "Request for Evidence Response Review", while the old header "Request for Evidence" vanishes. I was in the same boat like you. I spoke to my attorney's team and they offered me the insight glimpse of working of USCIS.
Well I responded in Oct 2008 and it had RFE status. It didnt change for the past 2 years and it changed to "RFE Review" yesterday. Is this just a coincidence or something to extract out of it ?
Well I responded in Oct 2008 and it had RFE status. It didnt change for the past 2 years and it changed to "RFE Review" yesterday. Is this just a coincidence or something to extract out of it ?
dresses 2011. Melissa Joan Hart
DOL_0903
07-11 05:12 PM
After reading the post on this thread, I am sure I must have fumbled something.:confused: Please read and advice
1. My wife came here (USA) on H4 visa in Dec 2005, got 1 year.
2. Applied for H1b in May 2006
3. Applied for H4 visa renewal in June 2006
4. H1B got approved Sept 25th
5. H4 got approved Oct 21th 06
6. Applied for SSN Jan 1st 2007.
7. Since SSN#, she is working
Is there any gotcha or issues that we might have created in between?
Is it a good idea to get H1b stamped from Canada?
1. My wife came here (USA) on H4 visa in Dec 2005, got 1 year.
2. Applied for H1b in May 2006
3. Applied for H4 visa renewal in June 2006
4. H1B got approved Sept 25th
5. H4 got approved Oct 21th 06
6. Applied for SSN Jan 1st 2007.
7. Since SSN#, she is working
Is there any gotcha or issues that we might have created in between?
Is it a good idea to get H1b stamped from Canada?
more...
makeup Melissa Joan Hart
gc_lover
06-29 05:35 PM
06/29/2007: Notice to The Oh Law Firm Clients
We have suspended the work for July 485 filing development pending the clarification of the rumor next week. Please bear with us in this confusing and difficult time.
06/29/2007: EB-Visa Number Retrogression?
There is a rumor going around that the State Department will issue a revised Visa Bulletin for July 2007 next Monday (July 2) or Tuesday (July 3) and that it may show retrogression of some or all EB categories, very likely to the point of unavailable for the month of July! Please stay tuned.
We have suspended the work for July 485 filing development pending the clarification of the rumor next week. Please bear with us in this confusing and difficult time.
06/29/2007: EB-Visa Number Retrogression?
There is a rumor going around that the State Department will issue a revised Visa Bulletin for July 2007 next Monday (July 2) or Tuesday (July 3) and that it may show retrogression of some or all EB categories, very likely to the point of unavailable for the month of July! Please stay tuned.
girlfriend quot;Melissa Joan Hartquot;
nyte_crawler
09-25 10:28 AM
Lets not get sidetracked by Mr Skillz with a Z.
Options for EB3I relief:
Option 1: CIR - This is not in the picture right now. Nobody knows when this is going to happen and I think we should not even bother to look upon this as a short term measure.
Option 2:Recapture of visas - Again this has to go through the legislative process. With the current political climate, it is going to take a tough task to get this one in as well.
Option 3:Re-intepreting and changing the spill over rule: This can be done without any legislative changes and USCIS can be asked to look on this if we can really force them to.
Steps to execute Option 3:
* Collect and consolidate all the data in a spreadsheet from the latest 485 inventory to the yearly reports of adjudicated cases
* Create a what if analysis for the next 3-5 years for EB2 I and EB3 I
* Create analysis to show what will happen with the old rule and changed interpretation of spill over
* Create a nice presentation
* Contact Senators, congressmen, USCIS and walk them through our presentation
Hopefully that can change their mind or atleast we gave our best shot.
Add your thoughts and inputs and let us create a plan on executing this, if folks want to do it.
Options for EB3I relief:
Option 1: CIR - This is not in the picture right now. Nobody knows when this is going to happen and I think we should not even bother to look upon this as a short term measure.
Option 2:Recapture of visas - Again this has to go through the legislative process. With the current political climate, it is going to take a tough task to get this one in as well.
Option 3:Re-intepreting and changing the spill over rule: This can be done without any legislative changes and USCIS can be asked to look on this if we can really force them to.
Steps to execute Option 3:
* Collect and consolidate all the data in a spreadsheet from the latest 485 inventory to the yearly reports of adjudicated cases
* Create a what if analysis for the next 3-5 years for EB2 I and EB3 I
* Create analysis to show what will happen with the old rule and changed interpretation of spill over
* Create a nice presentation
* Contact Senators, congressmen, USCIS and walk them through our presentation
Hopefully that can change their mind or atleast we gave our best shot.
Add your thoughts and inputs and let us create a plan on executing this, if folks want to do it.
hairstyles Posted on March 10, 2011
needhelp!
04-11 03:53 PM
So this $300/$500 collection target is something to work towards, but once I am in the team, I get to run/walk even if I am unable to raise the full amount, right?
acs_78
08-20 10:23 AM
Filed on May 21st. Finally got email that card production ordered
dummgelauft
05-04 11:37 PM
Finally, done
PD: June 7th 2006
SC: Texas
I-485 Status: Card Production Ordered
LUID: 05/04/2011
Thank you all IV friends.
One question,
Yesterday I sent my EAD renewel application. should put stop payment on check or should I call USCIS.
Thanks
MC
Good deal MC. Sleep tight. Please stay active on these fora. Your posts are a breath of fresh air ( to me, at least)...
PD: June 7th 2006
SC: Texas
I-485 Status: Card Production Ordered
LUID: 05/04/2011
Thank you all IV friends.
One question,
Yesterday I sent my EAD renewel application. should put stop payment on check or should I call USCIS.
Thanks
MC
Good deal MC. Sleep tight. Please stay active on these fora. Your posts are a breath of fresh air ( to me, at least)...
No comments:
Post a Comment